Here we go again: another supposedly ‘Catholic’ US university honours a prominent anti-Catholic. But why are we all so surprised?

From “Rorate Caeli” blog:

Another bishop toowoombed

Bishop Francesco Micciché, 68, of Trapani (Sicily, Italy) suffered today the same fate of Bishop emeritus Morris, of Toowoomba, Australia. From the Bollettino of the Holy See Press Office:

“The Holy Father, Benedict XVI, has dismissed from the pastoral care of the diocese of Trapani (Italy) H. E. Bishop Francesco Miccichè and has named Apostolic Administrator ad nutum Sanctae Sedis of the same diocese H. E. Archbishop Alessandro Plotti, emeritus of Pisa.”

Bishop Morris is now, of course, part of the dissenters’s speaking circuit. Micciché’s problem is of a different kind: over a million euros have disappeared from two diocesan foundations, and the Bishop Micciché is being personally investigated for this by the local prosecutor’s office.

What is that Masonic looking design on Gingrich”s left?
Why is so little said about Masonic secrecy and male dominance?

The article mentions the speaker’s pro-abortion views once, in the first paragraph and even then in brackets. It then uses the word a second, but only in a question. Hardly a way of making a “precise” point. The majority of the article speaks in general terms. 

The fact that you concentrate on the issue of abortion merely illustrates my point about moral relativism. There many ways a speaker could disagree with catholic doctrine, but they are usually ignored in favour of sexual matters.

 Georgetown and the majority of “Catholic” institutions are nominally so and they continue to claim this identity for PR and fundraising purposes only. We can lay this state of affairs squarely at the feet of the bishops of the United States. 99% of them have said nothing and done nothing as Catholic theology departments and administration ignored Church teaching and did so publicly with impunity. Georgetown has acted like this for years and the bishop is now just saying something? Too little too late. Cardinal Dolan did the same in Milwaukee when he was Archbishop there. He did nothing and said nothing about the shenanigans there. Again, expect more of the same from the bishops. The current canonical case Blatty is leading against Georgetown has come from the laity of course. The bishops would never do such a thing; they might get bad press.

Annie writes “let’s not forget” this [Jesuits covering up religious symbols].

Better still let’s use 2 or 3 of our billions of brain cells, which should be more than sufficient, to enable us to understand this.

Annie’s unspoken, absurd (and disgraceful), but strongly made, insinuation, that the Georgetown Jesuits were acting in some irreligious way is very silly and offensive.

Obama, and White House aids, would have had in mind The Constitutional requirement of the total separation of Church and state, and the Jesuits were being sensible.

Good old nasty JB24 !!!

Vatican II razed the bulwarks against the world, in the Church and in Catholic academia. Of course it’s to blame. Which document was it that called for full freedom of thought and expression in Catholic educational institutions? 

You a Jesuit, Father? I’ve heard all that from an Indian Jesuit before now. 

Perhaps one should at this point remind you of Pope Pius IX’s wonderfully concise explanation. You appear to be in great need of reading it:

“Not without sorrow we have learned that another error, no less destructive, has taken possession of some parts of the Catholic world, and has taken up its abode in the souls of many Catholics who think that one should have good hope of the eternal salvation of all those who have never lived in the true Church of Christ. Therefore, they are wont to ask very often what will be the lot and condition of those who have not submitted in any way to the Catholic faith, and, by bringing forward most vain reasons, they make a response favorable to their false opinion. Far be it from Us, Venerable Brethren, to presume on the limits of the divine mercy which is infinite; far from Us, to wish to scrutinize the hidden counsel and “judgements of God” which are “a great abyss” (Ps. 35.7) and cannot be penetrated by human thought. But, as is Our Apostolic Duty, we wish your episcopal solicitude and vigilance to be aroused, so that you will strive as much as you can to drive form the mind of men that impious and equally fatal opinion, namely, that the way of eternal salvation can be found in any religion whatsoever. May you demonstrate with skill and learning in which you excel, to the people entrusted to your care that the dogmas of the Catholic faith are in no wise opposed to divine mercy and justice.
“For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, will not be held guilty of this in the eyes of God. Now, in truth, who would arrogate so much to himself as to mark the limits of such an ignorance, because of the nature and variety of peoples, regions, innate dispositions, and of so many other things? For, in truth, when released from these corporeal chains ‘we shall see God as He is’ (1 John 3.2), we shall understand perfectly by how close and beautiful a bond divine mercy and justice are united; but as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is “one God, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. 4.5); it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry.
“But, just as the way of charity demands, let us pour forth continual prayers that all nations everywhere may be converted to Christ; and let us be devoted to the common salvation of men in proportion to our strength, ‘for the hand of the Lord is not shortened’ (Isa. 9.1) and the gifts of heavenly grace will not be wanting to those who sincerely wish and ask to be refreshed by this light.”

 The selling of souls has been going on for over 35 years. Those of us who attended said institutions were crying foul in the 1970s and no one listened in the episcopate, no one. And they are still not listening. Anti-life and dissenting speakers have abounded at 99% of these institutions for years and years. And always the same appeal to “freedom of inquiry” on the part of the administrators at the top. Almost never has a defender of life or a non-dissenting theologian or feminist ever been invited in the spirit of “free inquiry.” Again, Georgetown has been inviting speakers like Sebelius for years–few in the hierarchy have every objected. That needs to change, but I predict it will be the laity who will do the heavy lifting.

i think the phrase – wolf in sheeps clothing has the best definition of why . as we know , evil can use all forms of persuasion – lying , red herring , obliqueness , so on . so , where there is innocence there will be coruption . to me this is just another child abuse scandal where we have the people doing the dirt to those looking to them for the truth , with them walking around and promoting their goodnees so as to entice more victims .

You have reinforced very articulately the main points that I have made and I have just read that William Blatty the renowned and awarding winning author, has filed a Canon Law lawsuit against Georgetown University in his capacity as an ex-Alumni, because of the scandalous nature of it’s actions over the years which have betrayed the foundational Faith upon which it was founded.  Let us hopeful that the figures in authority who have influence in that once esteemed center of higher Catholic learning, can listen to reason and recapture the vision that the University once possessed.

Sort of, but this is institutionalised child murders we’re talking about here…

SINCE THEY ARE MOSTLY NOT APOSTLES BUT “CLEVER AND THE LEARNED” REMAINING COWARDLY IS ONLY NATURAL.

It would be much easier for all of us if the Catholic church asserted that the death penalty can under no circumstances be permitted. It does not, because the issue is far more complex than it might first appear. Personally, I think part of the reason for that is because the Church has not always been against the death penalty through the centuries.

Nonetheless, this issue is a bit or a red herring, and rather than be diverted by it, we should focus our attention on the issue at hand in the article. The death penalty has reared its ugly head on several articles on the Catholic Herald before, and there will no doubt be other occasions to discuss it.

I’m afraid you sound like the hair-splitting lawyer. The clause against the establishment of any religion by law ”
was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state.” (Thomas Jefferson and, in more recent times, the Supreme Court)
That is to say that this is the intention and meaning of the clause.

Perhaps they find the teaching of the Church too hard for them? If so, should they not be more honest about it?

The Masonic sign in the background at a catholic institution should be a hint- the smoke of Satan continues its infiltration

Whereas I can accept it in principle, but not in practice.

What Christ preached about was using the death penalty as punishment – which the Church does not allow. Clearly the adulterous woman was no danger to others and only put the salvation of herself and her partner in danger.

What Christ did not address in that passage is what should be done when the death penalty is the only recourse to save lives….The church has taught that it is permissible if there are no other options. I happen to agree that it is a sensible teaching since we are all duty-bound to protect the innocent.

I argue that none of the countries which use the death penalty have the moral right to do it. Even if they did, there is no way it would be used fairly, so I cannot push for it in practice.

I don’t really understand what you meant by  ‘Because “under no circumstances” is not Universal, therefore not Catholic.’

The problem of educational institutions which have abandoned fidelity to Catholic teaching is not unique to the United States.

It means you are too cowardly to address the subject and try to intimidate with big words that mean nothing. 

“Empty vessels, big noise”, “Little man, big shield”. There’s lot’s of truisms about your comment.

Because you never try to answer the question asked.